哲學於專業倫理中的實踐－以醫護倫理為例

The Practice of Philosophy in Professional Ethics-Take the Medical Ethics as the Example

10.29699/FJPS.200507.0009

蕭宏恩(Hung-En Hsiao)

哲學倫理學 ； 專業倫理 ； 倫理真理 ； 倫理實踐 ； Philosophy Ethics ； Professional Ethics ； Ethical Truth ； Ethical Practice

哲學論集

38期（2005 / 07 / 01）

243 - 263

繁體中文

「專業倫理」基本上是爲一統合學門，似乎不爲任何一學門所專屬，又似乎任一學門皆可擔負起專業倫理教育之重責大任！反之，又可能任一學門皆無法肯定其爲「專業」之一部份？身爲一名哲學學習者，筆者並無意於本文爲「專業倫理」作一定位之嘗試，而是要問：哲學倫理學既爲一切倫理學之基礎，那麼，「哲學」到底能爲「專業倫理」擔負起怎樣的責任？難道哲學只不過是提供一種倫理學的基本理論嗎？如果是，專業倫理的落實（從理論到實踐、由抽象到具體、自理想到現實）又是誰的責任？如果不是，哲學既擔負理論的基礎（倫理真理）又肩挑現實的作爲（倫理實踐）以成就道德價值，如此，哲學在專業倫理如何可能？本文即針對此作一嘗試性之探究。

The professional ethics is basically as a united science that it seems not subordinate to any science only and seems any science can bear the heavy responsibility of the education of professional ethics also. Contrarily, any science probably can not affirm it is a part of the profession? As a learner of philosophy, the writer will not attempt to do a fixed position for professional ethics, but want to ask: Since philosophical ethics is the fundamental of all other ethics, what the responsibility can philosophy bear for professional ethics after all? Is it possible philosophy only provide basic theories of ethics to professional ethics? If it is, who must bear the responsibility for the practicing of professional ethics (from theory to practice, from abstraction to concrete, and from idea to reality)? If it is not, philosophy bears the fundamental of theories (ethical truth) on the one hand, and shoulders the actual conducts (ethical practice) by means of achieving moral values on the other hand. Thus, how possible is philosophy in professional ethics? Accordingly, this paper aims directly at the thesis to try to make an investigation.

1. Singer, Peter A.ed.、蔡甫昌編譯(2003)。臨床生命倫理學。台北:財團法人醫院評鑑暨醫療品質策進會。
2. 艾立勤、潘小慧譯(1996)。從基本倫理的觀點看教授專業倫理的忌諱。專業倫理－論文集（一），台北:
3. 柯普斯登、傅佩榮譯(1986)。西洋哲學史（一）－希臘與羅馬。台北:黎明文化事業公司。
4. 許禮安(2002)。一個安寧醫生的手扎。台北:海鴿文化出版公司。
5. 鄔昆如編(2003)。哲學入門。台北:五南圖書出版公司。
6. 戴正德(2001)。生死醫學倫理。台北:健康文化事業公司。